Priority order and collusion (1 Viewer)

[spOOfy]

Background: A rule discussion has been brought up in my league regarding trading. Trade deadlines for the week would like to be extended until Sundays. To cover all bases, it has been discussed whether you should be allowed to trade a player who was just picked up at the waiver deadline (Team A picks up Player 1 this week and then trades him to Team B).

In a league that uses priority order of any kind, it was brought up that it could encourage collusion and an example was given:

Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.

Do you consider this collusion? Please discuss.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Background: A rule discussion has been brought up in my league regarding trading. Trade deadlines for the week would like to be extended until Sundays. To cover all bases, it has been discussed whether you should be allowed to trade a player who was just picked up at the waiver deadline (Team A picks up Player 1 this week and then trades him to Team B).In a league that uses priority order of any kind, it was brought up that it could encourage collusion and an example was given:Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.Do you consider this collusion? Please discuss.

Why would it be collusion? We allow it in my league. The top waiver spot is a commodity that can be used however the team that has it sees fit.

 

[Warhogs]

Background: A rule discussion has been brought up in my league regarding trading. Trade deadlines for the week would like to be extended until Sundays. To cover all bases, it has been discussed whether you should be allowed to trade a player who was just picked up at the waiver deadline (Team A picks up Player 1 this week and then trades him to Team B).In a league that uses priority order of any kind, it was brought up that it could encourage collusion and an example was given:Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.Do you consider this collusion? Please discuss.

Why would it be collusion? We allow it in my league. The top waiver spot is a commodity that can be used however the team that has it sees fit.

This.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.

I would ask the person using this example to show how this is collusive. Seems the same as any trade negotiation.

 

[spOOfy]

Background: A rule discussion has been brought up in my league regarding trading. Trade deadlines for the week would like to be extended until Sundays. To cover all bases, it has been discussed whether you should be allowed to trade a player who was just picked up at the waiver deadline (Team A picks up Player 1 this week and then trades him to Team B).In a league that uses priority order of any kind, it was brought up that it could encourage collusion and an example was given:Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.Do you consider this collusion? Please discuss.

Why would it be collusion? We allow it in my league. The top waiver spot is a commodity that can be used however the team that has it sees fit.

Using your commodity idea, I was in a league that allowed the trading of the spot. Most of my leagues the trade deadline for the week coincides with the waiver deadline so this isn't an issue. Plenty of times the player gets moved the next week.Thanks for the feedback.

 

[spOOfy]

Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.

I would ask the person using this example to show how this is collusive. Seems the same as any trade negotiation.

This has been discussed a bit in our league forums. A definition of collusion I found:

"Collusion" happens when two or more teams in the league conspire together to effect some outcome in the league. There are several types of collusion that can happen in fantasy football. As stated above, this happens when two teams who are supposed to be opponents and rivals combine their efforts or conspire to affect the outcome of a game or the season in some way. Collusion might occur to help one team win and secure a spot in the playoffs. Collusion might occur when team stacking or "farming" happens. Collusion might occur to try to change the rules or undermine one team's chances of winning.

The owner who thinks this is collusion believes that the 2 teams in the scenario are working together. Team A had no intention of acquiring Player 1, but Team B asks him to do it so the other teams in the league cannot pick up the player and he can have him. So, in his opinion, this is collusion as the 2 teams are working together to get around the priority rule.

 

[spOOfy]

Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.

I would ask the person using this example to show how this is collusive. Seems the same as any trade negotiation.

If I trade you great players so you will win this week because it helps my playoff chances is that collusion? It is getting off topic from the specific example, but is this the same as any trade negotiation?If trade you a kicker so you'll have one this week, but you have to promise to trade him back to me next week, is that collusion? Where do you draw the line between a normal trade negotiation and collusion?

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

This is standard contenders and rebuilders trades.

And I have gone as far as to email the guy with waiver priority and work out deals before waivers run.

I see nothing wrong with it at all.

 

[Warhogs]

Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.

I would ask the person using this example to show how this is collusive. Seems the same as any trade negotiation.

This has been discussed a bit in our league forums. A definition of collusion I found:

"Collusion" happens when two or more teams in the league conspire together to effect some outcome in the league. There are several types of collusion that can happen in fantasy football. As stated above, this happens when two teams who are supposed to be opponents and rivals combine their efforts or conspire to affect the outcome of a game or the season in some way. Collusion might occur to help one team win and secure a spot in the playoffs. Collusion might occur when team stacking or "farming" happens. Collusion might occur to try to change the rules or undermine one team's chances of winning.

The owner who thinks this is collusion believes that the 2 teams in the scenario are working together. Team A had no intention of acquiring Player 1, but Team B asks him to do it so the other teams in the league cannot pick up the player and he can have him. So, in his opinion, this is collusion as the 2 teams are working together to get around the priority rule.

The general definition I have always seen is when two teams work together for one of them to gain an unfair advantage. Do you not allow trading at all? Two teams must work together to negotiate a trade?

 

[Bill]

i see nothing wrong with this. its part of the game.

 

[GregR]

Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.

If Team A is picking up a player he is normally entitled to, and is making a normal trade with that player just like he would any other player on his roster, no it is not collusion.If Team A accepts $20 in cash to do it, or is intentionally accepting a trade he feels worsens his team, then it's collusion just like any other trade.Also worth mentioning that Team A is under no obligation to pick up the player, nor to trade him to Team B if he does. Team B is under no obligation to trade for the player once picked up from waivers. All that has happened is Team B has informed Team A he is interested in acquiring a player that Team B can roster.If you want such things to be binding then do as others have said and make waiver position be a commodity that can be directly traded. If you don't, then any discussions are non-binding just like any trade talks that are not yet executed on your web site.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

This is not collusion. To me, its the same as a scenario where I would not normally be interested in JStew via trade...but another owner tells me he's having no luck trading for him. And if I can get a deal done for him, he'll then trade me the 1.01 for him. This is just a random scenario, not supposed to be realistic. So I trade a WR for JStew, in order to flip him for the 1.01. I wouldn't NORMALLY have had any interest in trading for JStew, just like I wouldn't normally have interest, in your scenario, in the guy on the waiver wire.

Would you consider that collusion? Sometimes a trade just doesn't match up between two owners. But if you make it an impromptu 3-way trade, it can.

 

[RUSF18]

Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.

I would ask the person using this example to show how this is collusive. Seems the same as any trade negotiation.

If I trade you great players so you will win this week because it helps my playoff chances is that collusion? It is getting off topic from the specific example, but is this the same as any trade negotiation?If trade you a kicker so you'll have one this week, but you have to promise to trade him back to me next week, is that collusion? Where do you draw the line between a normal trade negotiation and collusion?

Both of those examples are collusion. Your original example isn't.By picking up the player that the guy at the back of the order desires, that he otherwise wouldn't want, the team with the #1 spot is losing out on the opportunity to pick up any other player. By trading said player to the other team, he is getting something back that he values higher than his other options on waivers.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.

I would ask the person using this example to show how this is collusive. Seems the same as any trade negotiation.

This has been discussed a bit in our league forums. A definition of collusion I found:

"Collusion" happens when two or more teams in the league conspire together to effect some outcome in the league. There are several types of collusion that can happen in fantasy football. As stated above, this happens when two teams who are supposed to be opponents and rivals combine their efforts or conspire to affect the outcome of a game or the season in some way. Collusion might occur to help one team win and secure a spot in the playoffs. Collusion might occur when team stacking or "farming" happens. Collusion might occur to try to change the rules or undermine one team's chances of winning.

The owner who thinks this is collusion believes that the 2 teams in the scenario are working together. Team A had no intention of acquiring Player 1, but Team B asks him to do it so the other teams in the league cannot pick up the player and he can have him. So, in his opinion, this is collusion as the 2 teams are working together to get around the priority rule.

By his definition of collusion, any trade negotiation would qualify. It's really pushing the envelope of "collusion" imo.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.

I would ask the person using this example to show how this is collusive. Seems the same as any trade negotiation.

If I trade you great players so you will win this week because it helps my playoff chances is that collusion? It is getting off topic from the specific example, but is this the same as any trade negotiation?If trade you a kicker so you'll have one this week, but you have to promise to trade him back to me next week, is that collusion? Where do you draw the line between a normal trade negotiation and collusion?

You said: "Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams." These two examples are not consistent with that assumption. The original "dilemma" in the OP is two teams negotiating a fair trade that helps both teams (in their opinions). Your first example may not be collusion if it wasn't planned between the two parties (and there's no trade back afterwards) - it would raise concerns if it was an egrecious trade. It's a little shady and in a grey area imo. It's probably a situation that should be avoided and a trade deadline would basically make this a non-issue anyway.Second example is roster sharing. Not allowed in most leagues.My guess is you are the one fighting against allowing it in your league. You're way off base imo. Maybe I just look at it differently, but I just don't see any issues.What is the issue you (or the owner if it isn't you) has with it? how exactly does it hurt the league? What is unfair about it? My guess is that you couldn't articulate an answer to those questions and just think its collusion (but have no basis for why).

 

[ChromeWeasel]

Background: A rule discussion has been brought up in my league regarding trading. Trade deadlines for the week would like to be extended until Sundays. To cover all bases, it has been discussed whether you should be allowed to trade a player who was just picked up at the waiver deadline (Team A picks up Player 1 this week and then trades him to Team B).In a league that uses priority order of any kind, it was brought up that it could encourage collusion and an example was given:Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.Do you consider this collusion? Please discuss.

You need an poll entry for "This question is ridiculous."

 

[Wadsworth]

Background: A rule discussion has been brought up in my league regarding trading. Trade deadlines for the week would like to be extended until Sundays. To cover all bases, it has been discussed whether you should be allowed to trade a player who was just picked up at the waiver deadline (Team A picks up Player 1 this week and then trades him to Team B).In a league that uses priority order of any kind, it was brought up that it could encourage collusion and an example was given:Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.Do you consider this collusion? Please discuss.

You need an poll entry for "This question is ridiculous."

Not to be mean, but I agree. It is really not even close.

 

[JD8p]

What makes this collusion? If it makes you feel better, just pretend they are trading the waiver spot for a player.

It is simply making the best use of your resources - whether it be using a player to get the guy on waivers, or the waiver spot to get a player on another team,

 

[spOOfy]

Thanks for all of the great feedback. I disagree that it is a ridiculous question to pose here as obviously at least 1 owner in my league thought to bring it up and a few people here did vote that way in the poll. So it was worth discussing. Of course, the overwhelming response was that it was not collusion. Thanks again.

 

[spOOfy]

Example: Team B is a top team and is last in the pickup order. Team A is 1st in the pickup order. Team B asks Team A to pickup Player 1 so they can then do a trade including Player 1. Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams.

I would ask the person using this example to show how this is collusive. Seems the same as any trade negotiation.

If I trade you great players so you will win this week because it helps my playoff chances is that collusion? It is getting off topic from the specific example, but is this the same as any trade negotiation?If trade you a kicker so you'll have one this week, but you have to promise to trade him back to me next week, is that collusion? Where do you draw the line between a normal trade negotiation and collusion?

You said: "Assume that the trade is even and helps both teams." These two examples are not consistent with that assumption. The original "dilemma" in the OP is two teams negotiating a fair trade that helps both teams (in their opinions). Your first example may not be collusion if it wasn't planned between the two parties (and there's no trade back afterwards) - it would raise concerns if it was an egrecious trade. It's a little shady and in a grey area imo. It's probably a situation that should be avoided and a trade deadline would basically make this a non-issue anyway.Second example is roster sharing. Not allowed in most leagues.My guess is you are the one fighting against allowing it in your league. You're way off base imo. Maybe I just look at it differently, but I just don't see any issues.What is the issue you (or the owner if it isn't you) has with it? how exactly does it hurt the league? What is unfair about it? My guess is that you couldn't articulate an answer to those questions and just think its collusion (but have no basis for why).

Like I said, this has been discussed a bit on my league board. It was stated that it feels like it is 2 teams working together to get around a rule. While yes, both teams get what they want and it is a fair trade, it was that aspect that bothered him. I should point out that he wasn't opposing the new rule, but really just talking philosophically about 1 team asking another team to pick up a player. It's been an interesting discussion, imo.

 

[GoFishTN]

#1 rule of fantasy football: If it doesn't benefit you, it's collusion!!!

 

[bigums]

Like I said, this has been discussed a bit on my league board. It was stated that it feels like it is 2 teams working together to get around a rule. While yes, both teams get what they want and it is a fair trade, it was that aspect that bothered him. I should point out that he wasn't opposing the new rule, but really just talking philosophically about 1 team asking another team to pick up a player. It's been an interesting discussion, imo.

Does your league give the ability to trade waiver priority? More specifically, does it forbid it and if so, is it by rule or by technical limitation?Many sites don't have the technical ability to trade waiver spots, so that may be why it feels "back room".

 

[Dr. Octopus]

It was stated that it feels like it is 2 teams working together to get around a rule.

What rule?

 

[houndirish]

Like others said ... not collusion.

That being said, something the original poster stated raises a red flag regarding trading.

Never put the caveat of "assume the trade is even and helps both teams" as a measuring stick, or a requirement to approve a trade. Trade evaluation is ridiculously subjective. You're setting yourself up to be constantly bombarded by whiney owners complaining because their division rival pulled off a percevied good deal that gives them an advantage. We don't even allow trade voting for this exact reason.

 

[spOOfy]

#1 rule of fantasy football: If it doesn't benefit you, it's collusion!!!

It's a hypothetical scenario.

 

[spOOfy]

Like others said ... not collusion.That being said, something the original poster stated raises a red flag regarding trading. Never put the caveat of "assume the trade is even and helps both teams" as a measuring stick, or a requirement to approve a trade. Trade evaluation is ridiculously subjective. You're setting yourself up to be constantly bombarded by whiney owners complaining because their division rival pulled off a percevied good deal that gives them an advantage. We don't even allow trade voting for this exact reason.

I said that so no question of player dumping came into the thought process. I wanted it based strictly on the parameters set.

 

[spOOfy]

It was stated that it feels like it is 2 teams working together to get around a rule.

What rule?

Our rules set priority for waivers on a worst to first reverse order, as I'm sure many other leagues do. So the rule in question would be that a good record team is asking a bad record team to help them get around this rule by asking the bad record team to select a player the good record team wouldn't otherwise be able to get. That was his sticking point on why he thought it was collusion. That a team is asking another team to help them "move up" in the priority order.To answer another question asked, there is no rule that states we can or can't trade waiver spots to another team. At this point it would be safe to assume it is not allowed unless we ever vote to allow them (it hasn't been brought up in the decade of the league's existence).

 

[Mello]

I don't see any reason why priority order shouldn't be a tradeable item. That's essentially what's occurring in the OP's scenario.

 

[bigums]

To answer another question asked, there is no rule that states we can or can't trade waiver spots to another team. At this point it would be safe to assume it is not allowed unless we ever vote to allow them (it hasn't been brought up in the decade of the league's existence).

Well, then that's why it seems collusive. I don't see it that way, but I can imagine that's why the owner brought it up.ETA: Agree with Mello

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

No different that trading Blind Bid $$.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

It was stated that it feels like it is 2 teams working together to get around a rule.

What rule?

Our rules set priority for waivers on a worst to first reverse order, as I'm sure many other leagues do. So the rule in question would be that a good record team is asking a bad record team to help them get around this rule by asking the bad record team to select a player the good record team wouldn't otherwise be able to get. That was his sticking point on why he thought it was collusion. That a team is asking another team to help them "move up" in the priority order.To answer another question asked, there is no rule that states we can or can't trade waiver spots to another team. At this point it would be safe to assume it is not allowed unless we ever vote to allow them (it hasn't been brought up in the decade of the league's existence).

You are waaaaaay overthinking this. This isn't circumventing a rule at all. The bottom team has a right to the first waiver spot and can use it in anyway that he thinks makes his team better. If he'd rather have what he thinks is a solid player from the "best" teams roster than what may be a flash in the pan, what is wrong with that. No one loses at all. The teams below the "worst" team can't complain they didn't get their guy, because the team above them "earned" the right to get that guy. I'm really stumped that its an issue at all - it seems like some one is trying really hard to create an argument for collusion.

Once again let me here you explain what exactly is unfair about this? How can it harm the league in anyway?